Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

…And They’re Not Done Yet! USCIS Has Just Imposed New Filing Fees and Forms!

Saturday, August 1st, 2020

On July 31, 2020, DHS (The Department of Homeland (In)Security) issued a “Final Rule” confirming that USCIS (Unconscionable, Shameful, Callous, Immoral, and Sinister) will be imposing steep fee increases for visa petitions as well as creating new forms. Assuming that the many lawsuits and injunctions that are already in the works don’t stop this, then on October 2, 2020 the following changes will go into effect:

  • There will now be two different petition forms to file for O and P visas.
    • To file for O and O-2 visas, you will use an I-129O
    • To file for all P visas (P-1, P-1S, P-2, P-3, and P-3S), you will use an I-129MISC
  • The new fee for filing for an I-129O will be $705.
  • The new fee for filing an I-129MISC will be $695.
  • There will be a cap of 25 beneficiaries per petition.
    • This means that an orchestra or performance troupe with 60 performers and 10 staff and crew will now need to file four—yes 4! – I-129MISC petitions (3 for the performers and 1 for the staff and crew) at a cost of $2780 for standard processing. If they want premium processing, then that will be an additional cost of $5760.
    • This also means that if any one of the 4 petitions gets an RFE, they will all get an RFE.
  • And speaking of premium processing, the current premium processing fee of $1440 will remain. HOWEVER, premium processing will now be 15 business days as opposed to 15 calendar days—effectively making it 19 days.

As part of the Final Rule, DHS provides written responses to the thousands of comments it received in opposition of these changes, including specific concerns and objections raised from throughout the arts industry. To those of you interested in mucking through the Final Rule’s 500 pages of flaming simian excrementum just click on the actual picture of flaming simian excrementum, below:

However, in response to detailed comments submitted by hundreds of arts organizations objecting to these proposed changes, several DHS pearls caught my eye:

  • In response to the concerns that these changes will have a particularly burdensome impact on the already struggling performing arts industry, DHS contends that this will have no economic impact on those who file O and P petitions and writes:  
    • “DHS does not intend to deter or unduly burden petitioners requesting workers in the arts, but any preferential treatment provided to petitioners for performers and musicians is borne by other petitioners, applicants, and requestors. DHS declines to require other applicants and petitioners subsidize the cost of petitioning for workers in the arts.”
    • TRANSLATION: “I once took my kid to the Monster Truck Dixie Rebel Stampede and Dinner Show and they charged me $17.50 for a Double Energy Mountain Dew! So, you people who work in the arts make more than enough money.”   

  • As to why USCIS is charging more for O petitions than P petitions, DHS writes:
    • “DHS implements fees based on data that show adjudications of O nonimmigrant   petitions require more staff, and are therefore more costly, than adjudications of petitions for nonimmigrant workers that may be requested using Form I129MISC.” 
    • TRANSLATION: “It takes a lot of time to confirm whether or not the role of the Phantom of the Opera is, in fact, a lead or starring role. And because its an opera, you’ll need a no-objection letter from AGMA instead of Actor’s Equity.”

  • In response to the issue of whether or not USCIS will continue to consider traditional expedites for non-profits who have an emergency or an immediate need (such as replacing a sick U.S. artist with an available non-US artist), DHS writes:   
    • “USCIS has implemented an expedite policy for certain petitions in the past. Whether a petitioner seeks to enhance the cultural and social interest in the United States may have been considered when USCIS decided to favorably exercise its discretion when considering expedite requests…DHS may consider whether to provide expedited processing for certain petitions based on its workload in other areas and ability to meet promised deadlines. Also, depending on the immigrant or nonimmigrant classification sought, the petitioner may request premium processing service by filing Form I-907 and paying the associated fee.
    • TRANSLATION: “We need the cash, so cough up the $1440 you Godless Leftists!
  • In response to the concern that increasing the premium processing period from 15 days to 19 days could imperil last minute engagements or emergencies, DHS writes:
    • DHS believes the possibility that a petitioner requesting premium processing service may need to wait a few additional days for adjudicative action is a small cost to impose for being able to expand premium processing to more requests and reduce the likelihood for future suspensions of premium processing service.
    • TRANSLATION: “Stop whining or we’re deporting Lin-Manuel Miranda! He’s Mexican, right?”
  • In response to the concern that putting a cap of 25 beneficiaries per petition could have a devastating financial impact on large performing arts tours, such as theater productions, orchestras, and dance companies, DHS responds:
    • USCIS must conduct full background checks on named workers and does not merely check to determine how much time the worker has spent outside of the United States…Because USCIS completes a background check for each named beneficiary, petitions with more named beneficiaries require more time and resources to adjudicate than petitions with fewer named beneficiaries. This means the cost to adjudicate a petition increases with each additional named beneficiary.
    • TRANSLATION: “Do you have any idea how long it takes to determine whether any of those musicians in the brass section have ever posted anything nasty about Beloved Leader?”
  • In response to the concern that, as USCIS often loses related petitions (such as O-1 and O-2 or P-1 and P-1S) and incorrectly sends them to different examiners who review them at different times, then requiring multiple petitions for the same large group will increase the likelihood of confusion and unnecessary RFEs, DHS asserts:
    • “DHS disagrees with commenters that the separating of Form I-129 will create confusion and delays.”
    • TRANSLATION: “Sorry we cannot offer any suggestions to address or solve your problem. Have we addressed all of your customer service concerns?  Have you tried our special for premium processing service for our most valued customers?
  • Many commenters on behalf of multiple industries all raised the question of why do this now in the midst of a pandemic and a economic crisis impacting all industries, to which DHS responds:
    • DHS makes no changes in this rule in response to the pandemic. USCIS considers  all available data at the time it conducts its fee review. USCIS conducted most of  the FY 2019/2020 fee review in FY 2017, before the emergence of the pandemic. At that time, USCIS did not foresee, and could not reasonably have foreseen, the effects of such a pandemic on USCIS receipt, revenue, or cost projections during the FY 2019/2020 biennial period, and we cannot project the effects at this time. The projections in this rule were based on conventional conditions, and with no way of knowing or being able to predict the long-term effects of COVID-19 at this point, DHS must assume that filing volumes will return to near previous levels  within a reasonable period.
    • TRANSLATION: “There is nothing to see here. All is well. Beloved Leader is the best leader in the world and all other leaders are jealous of him and his very large hands. All hail Believed Leader, Infallible General, Defender of the Faith, and Protector of the Good People Who Know Who You Are!”

And, on the heels of our recent post earlier in the day on July 31 that USCIS seems to be targeting artists who have remained in the U.S. during the pandemic without performing, we have learned of yet another artist receiving an RFE wherein USCIS is challenging whether or not the artist has been violating her status by remaining in the U.S. and not performing during the pandemic. So this may be a trend.

DHS’s recent actions, fueled by its spurious and odious responses to very legitimate concerns raised by an industry already struggling for survival throughout the world, needs to further the already excessively tested resolve of all of us to keep the doors open to artists throughout the world. In short, we shall fight them by being cleverer, more creative, and smarter than they are. We shall fight them in our petitions. We shall fight them at the consulates. We shall fight them at the airport immigration halls. We shall fight them with mockery, distain, and relentless provocation. We shall fight them at the ballot box, but we shall never surrender!

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit OUR NEW WEBSITE: ggartslaw.com

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty or threatening email to someone, filing a lawsuit, or basically doing anything that may in any way rely upon an assumption that we know what we are talking about.

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Uncategorized, Visas | Comments Closed

Trump Punishes Students For Taking On-Line Classes

Tuesday, July 7th, 2020

Last night, July 6, 2020, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced that all F-1 (student) visa holders attending schools that have decided to operate entirely on-line for the fall 2020 semester due to the COVID-19 pandemic will not be permitted to take a full online course load and remain in the U.S., forcing schools and non-U.S. students to make potentially life-threatening decisions if non-U.S. students wish to enter and/or remain in the U.S.

Click Here to read the proclamation:

Students who are currently outside the U.S. and are enrolled in schools that will be offering only on-line courses during the fall 2020 semester will not be permitted to receive F-1 visas (assuming they can find an open consulate) or enter the U.S. (assuming they are not already a citizen on the list of banned countries.) Such students who are already in the U.S. and enrolled in such programs will be required either to depart the U.S. or transfer to a school which will be offering in-person and/or on-campus courses. If they fail to do so, they will be subject to deportation proceedings.

Students attending schools that have decided to adopt a hybrid model—that is, a mixture of on-line and in-person instruction—will be permitted to remain and/or enter the U.S. provided such students are not taking an entirely on-line course load for the fall 2020 semester and are taking only the minimum number of on-line classes required to make normal progress in their degree program.

No, we do not actually know how they will define “the minimum number of online classes required to make normal progress in their degree program. Presumably, they will be looking for hybrid programs that require the majority of the course instruction to be in-person as opposed to on-line. In other words, offering or requiring only a single in-person course and everything else on-line may not be sufficient.

ICE has also given no clarification on how hybrid programs will be required to schedule the on-line versus in-person instruction throughout the fall 2020 semester. That is, we do not know whether or not F-1 students who are already outside of the U.S. will be permitted to enter if the first half of their fall 2020 semester will be on-line only with in-person courses to be determined later in the semester. They could be denied entry or required to leave until they will actually be taking in-person courses.

There is no indication at this time that this rule will have any impact on F-1 students who have completed their course of study and have either already been approved for or are eligible for OPT. They are not required to be taking courses in the first place as, presumably, they have already graduated. Those students on CPT, on the other hand, WILL be subject to these new rules. While there is not much we know definitively, at this time we are recommending the following:

  • Schools should consider developing hybrid programs that provide for some degree of socially distanced in-person rehearsals or one-on-one instructions throughout the fall 2020 semester.
  • Ensure that all F-1 students who are currently outside the U.S. be given additional  documentation from their school that they can provide to consulate and immigration  officers confirming that (i) they are not taking an entirely on-line course load and (ii) if the first part of the fall 2020 semester will be on-line, why such courses cannot be taken  outside of the U.S.
  • Presenters, venues, agents, and managers should confirm that any F-1 artists they have engaged or represent are enrolled in schools with eligible hybrid programs for the fall 2020 semester.    
  • Consider switching eligible students from F-1 to O-1 sooner rather than later.

There has been some speculation as to the motivations behind this, including that the White Pride Piper wants to force schools to re-open. More likely, however, is that he is taking advantage of the pandemic to further his previously stated desire to limit the number of F-1 students in the U.S. It has long been the opinion of the Ringwraiths in his administration that F-1 students pose an inherent threat to our self-perceived greatness.

Lastly, just as a reminder, many U.S. Consulates remain closed and the travel bans on citizens from certain countries being able to enter the U.S. remain in place.

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty or threatening email to someone, filing a lawsuit, or basically doing anything that may in any way rely upon an assumption that we know what we are talking about.

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Uncategorized, Visas | Comments Closed

WE ALL NEED TO STREAM SOMETIME

Monday, June 15th, 2020

(Understanding Streaming Rights)

As we all try to figure out how to cobble the performing arts world together, more and more venues, presenters, and artists are turning to streaming–live streams, virtual performances, and showing archived footage of previously recorded concerts.

For now, these efforts are critical as a means to stay connected with audiences. Soon, these will need to be turned into additional revenue streams as well. Regardless, this is unchartered territory for many, particularly with regard to the rights and licenses necessary to stream performances and recordings.

But first things, first: We need to clear up a few definitions.

“Streaming” is where you upload a recording to a source or platform so that it can be heard or watched by an audience over the Internet. While this can be done through your own website or server, most recordings and videos are viewed through a third party platform such as YouTube, Instagram, FaceBook, Vimeo, SnapChat, Netflix, YouTube, Hulu, Pandora, Spotify, TikTok, RiffRaff, Taffeta, Titipu, KoKo, PishTush, PoohBah, and YumYum, among others.

Don’t be confused by the terms “Streaming” and “Live Streaming.” They mean the same thing. Remember, there is no standard terminology in the performing arts industry. Whether you intend to stream an archival recording of a performance, create and stream a new recording made in a studio or venue, broadcast a live concert to an audience who can watch it in real time as it is taking place, make a recording available for free, or make a recording available on-demand for a fee, these are just various types of “streaming.”

The key distinction is that a streamed recording remains at all times on the platform for the audience to watch only through the platform and cannot be downloaded. Downloading is when you are able to take a recording from the Internet and copy it from the platform to your own computer or phone. Apple I-Tunes, for example, is a downloading platform whereas Apple Music is a streaming platform. Streaming is like listening to the radio in your car. Downloading is like buying the CD. Similarly, Amazon Prime gives you the option of renting a movie to watch for a fixed period of time or buying a copy of a movie to download and watch on your own devices.

Whether using an archival recording or streaming a live concert, Obtaining the necessary rights and licenses to stream a concert or performance essentially involves the same considerations and questions you would ask (hopefully) with regard to presenting any live performance:

  • Do you need a license from the owner of the music to perform the music? 
  • Do you need a license from the owner of the music to use the music as part of a musical, dance performance, or opera?
  • Do you need a license from the owner of the music to make re-orchestrations, new arrangements or significant adaptations?
  • Do you need a license from the owner of the music to record and stream the performance of the music?    
  • Do you need a license from the performers to record and stream their performance?
  • Do you need a license from the owner of the recording of the music to stream the recording?

Essentially, to get permission to record and stream a performance, you will potentially need licenses from three different parties:

  1. The Performer(s)
  2. The owner of the music
  3. The owner of the recording

Licenses From The Performer(s)

If your intent is to stream an archival recording, you will need to ensure that you had the right to make an archival recording in the first place and what you are allowed to do with it. This should have been spelled out in the initial engagement contract for the performance. If not, you will need to go back to the artist(s) and request permission to stream the existing recording.

If you are seeking to create a new recording or record a live concert for streaming, then among the other engagement details you will need to request permission from the artist(s) to record and stream the performance. Certain artists, particularly orchestras, may have union contracts or other restrictions (such as exclusive recording agreements with labels) that will not permit any recordings or streaming without additional licenses and fees.

Even if you get all of the necessary licenses from the artist(s) to record and stream their performance, you are only a third done. Remember, unless an artist is recording her own music, artists do not control the music they perform. So, just because an artist gives you the right to make and stream an archival recording of the artist or the right to record and stream a live performance, you will still need to obtain permission from the owner of the music to perform, record, and stream. 

Licenses From The Owner of The Music

Any time you intend to perform music at a live concert, you need permission to perform it (what I like to call “stand and sing.”) Except for instances of music being used as part of a musical, dance, or opera production, such permissions are most often arranged by purchasing performance licenses through Performing Rights Organizations (PROs) such as ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, GRM, etc., when you purchase a performance license from a PRO, the terms of the license will govern what you can and cannot do with the music as part of the “performance.” Like everything else, nothing is standard. Everything depends on the type and terms of the license you purchased. These will differ from nightclubs to non-profit venues to schools to for-profit theatres, etc, so you will need to read your specific license to see what you can and cannot do and what additional rights you might need. However, here are some generalizations:

  • More often than not, streaming is covered in a performance license as long as the end user is viewing the recording on a platform licensed by the PRO, such as YouTube, Instagram, FaceBook, Vimeo, SnapChat or TikTok. Embedded, proprietary players owned by these licensed platforms (YouTube being the most common example) and embedded into the presenter website are also covered.
  • More often than not, streaming from the websites of colleges and universities (.edu) are also usually covered by the performance license.  
  • More often than not, streaming directly from the website of an artist, venue, or presenter is NOT COVERED without obtaining additional licenses. This is true of live streaming as well as archived videos of past performances. So, when in doubt, always opt to stream through a platform already licensed by the PRO.
  • Downloadable recordings are NOT COVERED. These rights need to be obtained directly from the owners or publishers of the music. Most PRO’s cannot issue such rights.
  • Performance licenses also do not cover the performance of music as part of a musical, dance performance, or opera. Those licenses must be obtained directly from the owner or publisher of the music. Most PROs cannot issue such rights.
  • Most performance licenses do not include the right to make re-orchestrations, new arrangements, or significant adaptations of the music. Those licenses must be obtained directly from the owner or publisher of the music. Most PROs cannot issue such rights.

Licenses From The Owner of The Recording

An oft overlooked concept is that recordings are separately, copyrightable creations. When a recording is made, it is owned by the person or organization that made, edited, and mastered the recording and NOT by the owner of the music which was recorded and NOT by the performer who performed it. (Believe me, this comes as quite a shock to composers and performers who presume that if they are on the recording then it’s also theirs to use.)  So, once you get all of the necessary rights and licenses to record and stream a performance, you will also need to make sure that you obtain permission from the person who recorded it—even if it is a volunteer or a member of your staff. In fact, especially if it is a volunteer. Short of children performing with fire and audience sitting on broken glass, volunteers are often the largest source of grief. (Ok, there’s also the board to consider, but I digress.)

A few final thoughts:

Everyone needs to obtain rights and licenses regardless of whether or not you charge a fee to watch the streaming concert.

  1. If you don’t know what rights you already have or what rights you need, always reach out to the performer(s), the owner of the music, and the owner of the recording. Never assume or just hope that someone else with do the “right thing.” The “right thing” is an extraordinarily subjective concept.
  1. Anyone can charge whatever they want to issue a license, or not charge anything at all, or refuse to issue a license for any reason. Everything is subject to negotiation as influenced by each person’s degree of largesse, munificence, guilt, desperation, fear, uncertainty, pride, greed, wrath, envy, lust, gluttony, and sloth.
  1. There are no special Covid-19 exceptions.
  1. There are no special non-profit or school exceptions.
  1. Everyone is screwed right now. No one is more or less screwed than anyone else. Everyone is going to need to compromise if we are going to survive this.

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Artist Management, Arts Management, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Licensing, Music Rights, Uncategorized | Comments Closed

DECODING TRUMP’S IMMIGRATION BAN

Thursday, April 23rd, 2020

By Brian Taylor Goldstein

To those of you wondering what is happening with The Screaming Carrot Demon’s immigration ban, his Executive Order slithered out of the White House today. Here’s the deal:

Today’s spewage only addresses immigrant visas (green cards). Though there is a fairly long list of exceptions, for the next 60 days people outside the U.S. will not be able to receive green cards even if they have already been approved.

The Executive Order states that another order will be issued dealing with non-immigrant visas (O and P) in 30 days. However, so long as the consulates remain closed, no one is getting visas O and P visas anyway. All U.S. embassies and consulates have currently suspended non-immigrant interviews and are not issuing visas. No announcement has been made about when the government plans to reopen them. It is likely that consulates will reopen on a rolling, country-by-country basis depending on when Trump’s ego next sees its shadow. Not surprisingly, if Trump wanted to thwart O and P visas, he would not need to issue an Executive Order. The State Department could just keep the consulates closed or on a reduced staff. However, an Executive Order is better for red hat ratings.

In the meantime, USCIS service centers continue to receive and process visa petitions, issue receipt notices and approval notices—as well as RFEs and Denials. (Not all human viruses are microscopic!) So long as USCIS continues to process petitions, I “suspect” that artists who are already in the U.S. will continue to be able to extend and/or change their status, but those outside who get approved petitions will have to wait until the consulates re-open.

For those of you so inclined, here is a link to the actual Executive Order, which can also be printed out and used as a Covid mask.

Print Your Own Covid Mask

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Uncategorized, Visas | Comments Closed

USCIS JUST THREW ARTISTS A CRUMB!

Tuesday, April 7th, 2020

Unemployment and the CARES Act For Non-US Artists

April 7, 2020

By Brian Taylor Goldstein

Shocking as it may sound, USCIS has passed a tiny wind of hope in the direction of artist visas during this coronavirus pandemic.

The Department of Homeland Security (which sets the policies for USCIS) has confirmed that applying for unemployment benefits and/or applying for benefits under the recently enacted Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act WILL NOT be taken into consideration as violations of the Public Charge Rule when reviewing petitions for O or P status or green cards. (This does not include Medicaid or any government program (other than unemployment or CARES) which requires a “means test”—ie: programs which require someone to show that they make under a certain level of income.

It remains to be seen as to whether or not applying for or receiving unemployment benefits will later be insidiously used by USCIS as a “gotcha” under the separate rule that if an artist becomes unemployed, they are not authorized to remain in the U.S. and look for work and are required to leave. So, applying for unemployment benefits could “theoretically” still be used by USCIS as an admission by an artist that they have no work. However, as I wrote last week, USCIS has also generally, sorta, kinda, implied that they will be “reasonable” in light of the Covid-19 situation…and that’s about as good as you’re going to get from them until they change their minds.

For now, if any non-US artist finds themselves furloughed or unemployed, which is likely to be most of you, you may now take advantage of whatever unemployment and/or CARES benefits you may be entitled to. So glissando, tap dance, and project your way to those websites and start applying before the airlines and pharmaceutical companies gobble all the funds up. Godspeed.

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Artist Management, Employees, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Uncategorized, Visas | Comments Closed

A CORONAVIRUS VISA ROUNDUP FOR NON-US ARTISTS

Tuesday, March 31st, 2020

Cancelled Engagements, Unemployment, Layoffs, and Visa Renewals

March 31, 2020

By Brian Taylor Goldstein

As the tumbleweeds blow through Times Square and we begin to consider the viability of Easter peeps or even kale to supplement the dwindling toilet paper supplies, there is an understandable amount of angst and confusion on many fronts. Not least among them are non-U.S. artists who find themselves trapped inside the U.S. with no engagements, or with visas about to expire, or, like so many, laid off or unemployed.

There is a lot of conflicting information out there primarily because U.S. immigration policies are determined by the U.S. Government which has provided little or no direction on these issues; they are far too engrossed trying to quell the spread of the Coronavirus through sacrificing chickens, burning witches, assessing blame, and finding new and enthralling ways of praising and consoling Our Dear Beloved Leader and Perfect Incarnation of The Appearance That A Leader Should Have.

So, in no particular order, here is an update of what we know (or sort of know based on what we can surmise from what we know.) Premium Processing

1. Premium Processing
In case you have not already heard, USCIS suspended Premium Processing effective March 20, 2020. Until further notice, any future petitions filed with premium processing will automatically be sent to standard processing and your premium processing fee returned. Current standard processing times are ranging from 3 – 6 months at both of the paradoxically named USCIS “service” centers.

2. Artists Trapped In The U.S.
Due to the quagmire of travel restrictions, cancelled flights, and border closures, there are a number of artists who find themselves stranded in the U.S. with visas about to expire and who are unable to leave. Has USCIS has made any special exceptions or provisions for artists who may be forced to remain in the U.S. beyond the expiration date of their visa until they can fly home? Certainly, they will not be rounded up as enemies of the state? To the contrary, if an artist finds themselves in the U.S. in such situation, then before their current visa expires they will need to file a petition either to extend their current status and extend their stay, or change their current status to a different status and remain.

Here’s a real life question we received on this issue:

My O-1 visa expires in May. I was approved for a new one starting in August. My petitioner did not ask for an extension of stay because I was supposed to fly home for a summer festival, but that has been cancelled and now I want to stay in the U.S. What are my options?

If the artist has some engagements in the U.S. between May and August (which is unlikely, but possible), then prior to May she could file a new I-129 petition (which would basically be the old one re-copied and re-packaged) asking for an extension of stay. However, if she does not have engagements to justify her remaining in the U.S. on an employment visa, then prior to May she will need to file an I-539 petition to change her status from O-1 to visitor (B-1/B-2). Of course, to file a new I-129, she will need to pay the USCIS filing fee of $460. To file an I-539, she will need to pay the USCIS filing fee of $370, plus a biometric fee of $85. Biometrics consist of going to a local USCIS office to be photographed and provide fingerprints. However, all local USCIS office are all closed. So, presumably, the I-539 petitions will just get put on hold—which is probably a good thing as she can stay in the U.S. while the petition is pending. I should point out that in 99.99999% of cases, I-539 petitions are denied, so they are really only useful to buy time.

3. Consulates
Most of the U.S. consulates around the world have closed. London, for example, is currently not taking appointments until July. We do not know when they will re-open. We asked the U.S. Department of State and were told: “April! No, June? Wait! They’re closed? They’ve always been closed. I mean, open. They’re open now, just closed to the public. Temporarily.”

4. What Happens To A Visa If An Artist Is Laid Off?
Here’s another real life scenario:

We are looking for information about the impact of layoff on our O-1 visa holders. The remainder of our performance season has been cancelled. At this time we are continuing to pay our performers as per the schedule that is in their contract. Unfortunately the possibility of a layoff is looming. How would this impact the O-1 visa holders? Are their visa’s invalidated if we have to do layoffs?

Fortunately (sort of), as non-US artists are required to have artist visas to perform in the U.S. regardless of whether or not they are paid, a layoff, per se, does not impact the validity of their O-1 visas. Rather, the issue is whether or not the artist’s services will be required at all. In other words, are we dealing with a cancelled performance or a re-scheduled performance?

If an artist was approved for an O-1visa to perform in a specific engagement or production, and that engagement or production is cancelled, then they are required to leave the U.S. as, unless they were approved for a multi-employer visa, they no longer have a reason to be here. However, if the scheduled performances are merely being re-scheduled for a later date during the validity period of the artist’s existing visa, and the artist’s services will still be needed, then I would argue that they can remain in the U.S. regardless of whether or not they are paid—they just won’t be able to work. In other words, a layoff means they are still employed, just not getting paid.

Whether or not the artist can afford to remain in the U.S. without being paid is another issue entirely…and which leads to the next question.

5. What Is The Impact On A Visa If an Artist Applies for Unemployment or Medicaid?
Here’s a hard one:

As you probably already know, all of my concerts until June have been cancelled, thus putting me into a difficult situation financially. I wanted to consult with you whether it would be a good idea for me to apply for unemployment benefits, or is that going to jeopardize my current O-1 status and future potential status?

Unfortunately, this creates two not insignificant problems:

  • (a) Under Trump’s recently enacted “public charge rule,” applying for any kind of public assistance (unemployment, Medicaid, etc) could be used to deny and/or delay future visas or green cards. When the artist next needs to obtain a new O-1, if he elects to remain in the U.S. and seeks an extension of stay, he would need to disclose that he applied for and/or received public assistance. This will lead to his being required to explain why and seek a waiver. USCIS has indicated that they will be “reasonable” in light of the Covid-19 situation, but we have no idea what that means. I trust USCIS about as much as trust my mother when she asks for my honest opinion. Alternatively, the artist could avoid this question by leaving the U.S. when his current visa expires, applying for a new visa at a U.S. consulate, and then re-entering. However, should at some point in the future he want to apply for a green card, he would need to disclose the public assistance and request a waiver at that time.
  • (b) The other problem is that O and P visas are “employment-based” visas, which means an artist is only authorized to be in the U.S. on such a visa if the artist has employment. If an artist becomes unemployed, they are not authorized to remain in the U.S. and look for work. They are required to leave. So, applying for unemployment benefits equates with admitting the artist is here illegally.

6. Requests for Evidence and Notices of Intent to Deny
USCIS has announced that any petitioner who receives a Request for Evidence (RFE) or Notice of Intent To Deny (NOID) between March 1 and May 1, 2020, will be given an additional 60 calendar days to respond after the response deadline set forth in the RFE or NOID. However, USCIS will continue its policy of employing rabid ferrets to write the RFEs.

7. Can A Visa For A Cancelled Concert Be Reissued?
Here’s a question from a dear soul who believes that if we just clap hard enough, Tinkerbell will grow her wings back:

We got an artist approved to perform for us in June. That date, of course, has now been cancelled. However, we have rescheduled the concert for the 20/21 season. Since we already applied for the visa and got it approved, and given that we only had to cancel because of the coronavirus, will USCIS re-approve the visa for the new date without having to file a new petition and go through the process all over again?

As my mother would say: “Bless his heart,” which, in the South, is the kind of thing one says when Charlene gets her head stuck in the fishbowl again…for the 3rd time. No, he will need prepare and submit an entirely new petition, and pay all of the costs and fees again. Because of all the cancellations due to the Coronavirus, the Performing Arts Visa Task Force (a long established coalition of leading arts organizations throughout the field—from the League of American Orchestras to the Association of Performing Arts Presenters) has asked the U.S. government to consider allowing approved visas to be re-authorized to cover re-scheduled dates without having to pay any new filing fees or costs. However, just to be on the safe side, I have added the same request in my letter to Santa Clause as I have greater faith in him making my wishes come true than I do USCIS.

Ok, folks. That’s all I got. Until everything changes tomorrow. As always, continue to check our website and Musical America for more frequent updates.

Stay safe and well!

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Artist Management, Employees, Independent Contractors, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Uncategorized, Visas | Comments Closed

What We Know So Far About Trump’s Coronavirus Travel Ban

Friday, March 13th, 2020

By Brian Taylor Goldstein

In short, not much. As you can imagine, this was announced without any details as to how, exactly, this was going to work in terms of screening, implementation, flight schedules, etc. But here what we know so far…

  • Anyone who has been in one of the 26 European countries in the Schengen zone within 14 days prior to Friday, March 13, 2020, they will not be allowed to board the plane and/or enter the U.S. for the next 30 days.
  • The 26 European countries in the Schengen zone — Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland.
  • The ban does NOT apply to the U.K. or Ireland, as well as Croatia, Cyprus, Ireland, Turkey and Ukraine. (No one knows why, though it just so happens that both the U.K. and Ireland both host Trump golf resorts…hmmm.) However, while the citizens and residents of these countries are exempted from the travel ban, if they have visited any of the European countries on Trump’s list over the past 14 days, then they are subject to the FULL 30 day ban.
  • The ban does NOT apply to permanent residents (green card holders), U.S. citizens, and the spouses, parents or siblings of American citizens or permanent residents, as well as members of the U.S. military and their spouses and children. However, they will be restricted to flying to specific U.S. airports for screening.

In addition, we have just learned today that:

  • The U.S. embassy in Oslo and Lisbon has temporarily ceased all visa operations until further notice due to the outbreak of Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19. It’s highly likely that more embassies and consulates will follow suit.
  • Denmark just announced it was closing its borders.

We will keep you informed as soon as we know of any changes, on our social media pages (so we don’t bombard you with emails). If you would like to stay updated follow our social media links at the bottom of the page.

Lastly, Trump has asked that everyone remember that he warned us this would happen if we kept letting foreigners into the U.S. and now we should be ashamed of what we have done to his perfect economy.

_____________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com

________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Acts of God, Artist Management, Arts Management, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Touring, Uncategorized, Visas | Comments Closed

The Response of the Performing Arts to the World Premiere of the Coronavirus

Wednesday, March 4th, 2020

By Brian Taylor Goldstein

Let’s all step back and take a breath for moment.

As you can imagine, the coronavirus has overrun (dare I say “infected?”) our office with an ever growing stream of cancellations based on force majeur and concerns from venues, presenters, agents, and artists from around the world. As the situation has continued to develop (dare I say “spread?”) so rapidly, we have so far focused solely on dealing with issues on a case-by-case basis rather than take on the task of posting any advice or updates which might be outdated in 2 days.

However, as cancellations are becoming more frequent and more likely, we have increasingly begun to receive questions from all sides about what does and does not constitute a legitimate force majeure cancellation and who is responsible for lost income and covering expenses. While not at all unreasonable concerns, we get the sense that people are “preparing for battle” rather than accepting the reality of a shared crisis in which we all find ourselves. For instance, we have been told:

  • That no one can call off a concert unless the U.S. government “officially” declares a pandemic. (That’s unlikely given the regime’s current position that this can all be resolved through the power of prayer alone.)
  • That venues are “legally” required to educate their audiences not to be led by fear and racism. (Since when? I missed this in law school.)
  • That artists should not be allowed to cancel unless they come from the specific part of a country where there have been cases. (So it doesn’t matter that an audience is not going to come to see a South Korean artist regardless of what part of Korea they have just arrived from?)
  • “They cancelled a month ago, before there were any outbreaks, so they shouldn’t be able to get the benefit of that now!” (So, the fact that they wound up making the right decision is irrelevant?)
  • “The coronavirus cases in their state is not anywhere near where their venue is located!” (Do you live there? Are you planning on going to the concert yourself?)
  • “Airlines are still flying to the U.S. from that country, and the artist is willing to be quarantined, so the venue cannot cancel!” (So, just because someone has found a way to break into my house, I have to let them stay so long as they promise not to cough in my face?)

And I JUST heard an idea being tossed about of adding a Force Majeure “penalty fee” clause to contracts. (Why stop there? Why not a public shunning?)

Without a doubt, and not in the least to dismiss the gravity of potential, if not, devastating financial losses throughout the performing arts, these arguments miss the point. Everyone is facing difficult decisions and financial loss—and not just in the performing arts.

Whether you are anticipating a cancellation or it has already happened, you should take the following immediate steps:

STEP 1: Review Your Contract

Most contracts will actually spell out the situations that allow for a Force Majeure cancellation, including what the parties are and are not responsible for.

STEP 2: Prepare Martini (gin, slightly dirty, extra olives)

STEP 3: Discard Your Contract and Accept Reality

The legal concept of Force Majeure or Act of God anticipates situations where one or both of the parties to a contract cannot meet their obligations due to something outside of their control and which could not have reasonably been anticipated. A fire in the venue. An artist gets sick. A snowstorm closes an airport. Etc. However, there does not have to be a physical impediment to the performance for a performance contract to be permissibly cancelled due to a force majeure. Does a theater have to actually burn all the way down? Can the artist insist that they are still willing to perform on what’s left of the smoldering stage? What if the artist is sick, but not dead? Can the venue insist that the artist be dragged on stage with a portable oxygen tank?

At present, in the case of a new virus that has spread internationally and was previously unknown, while an official government declaration or ban on travel would certainly make things simpler, that is by no means a requirement. In just two months, we have long been overtaken by circumstances justifying both venues and artists to declare a force majeure for any number of reasons, including:

  • A show involving artists coming from or who have recently been to an infected area.
  • Travel restrictions or quarantine requirements imposed by a state or local government in the the U.S. and or any country in the world that might impact the ability of an artist or group to leave their own country and/or enter or leave the U.S.
  • An artist from one part of the U.S. traveling to another part of the U.S. where cases have been reported.
  • Venues deciding to close out of abundance of caution.
  • An artist wishing to cancel to avoid exposure or to avoid being trapped inside or outside the U.S. should official travel bans start to be put in place.

On their face, these are all a reasonable. Conversely, it may, in fact, be unreasonable for someone to insist on a performance taking place where there was even a “reasonable” risk of putting an artist or audience in harm’s way. If God (and/or Goddess and/or the universal cosmic energy) forbid, someone were to get sick, this could raise significant issues of liability for negligence.

The reality is that we are all facing the same situation (and our own office is no exception) which, without a doubt will impact some more than others. There are already several universities who have cancelled classes and performances out of an abundance of caution. Some venues in the U.S. have informed artists from China, Iran, South Korea, Japan, Italy, and Hong Kong (and that list will most certainly grow) that they will not be allowed to enter the venue for 14 days after arriving in the U.S. Others around the world have either imposed similar restrictions or closed completely, including major opera houses and concert halls. Are these decisions going to impact travel costs, tour dates, lost engagement fees, lost commissions, and even risk an artist exceeding a visa validity period? Of course.

However, even if you believe a cancellation is unreasonable or even if it goes so far as to violate the terms of the contract, what then? Raise contractual and legal arguments? Send snippy and condescending emails? Bring in a lawyer? Sue? While there are almost always legal arguments and threats one could through at any situation, doing so with regard to anyone’s response to an unknown and spreading virus which is causing world-wide fear and confusion is not merely delusional, but will certainly trigger ethical, professional, and PR concerns that will haunt you far beyond any lost income.

While not all of these will apply to everyone in every situation, here are some practical suggestions for dealing with an actual or threatened cancellation due to the coronavirus:

  • Anticipate and prepare financially for losses;
  • Explore options for mitigating losses, such as refundable tickets, cancellation policies, and the risks and liabilities of not cancelling sooner rather than later;
  • Listen to the fears and concerns of all parties;
  • Entertain any and all reasonable alternatives to a cancellation, such as checking constantly for updates from the CDC or WHO, as well as reaching out to local health and public safety experts either in the location of the performance or in the location from which an artist will be traveling.
  • Entertain any and all reasonable proposals to share losses, taking into consideration a fair, honest, and truthful assessment of who is in a better position to bear them;
  • Consider the professional and ethical considerations of pressing an argument, making demands, or simply acting like a jerk;
  • If a deposit has not been paid, consider it no longer due. If a deposit has already been paid, apply it towards actual, non-refundable expenses (such as airline tickets, rental fees, etc.) and return the rest; and, of course;
  • Try to re-book the date.

In addition, here are some websites with calm, cool, and well-thought advice, including suggestions of how to prepare and what to consider:

www.artsready.org

www.americanorchestras.org

However rightly or wrongly you may think someone’s decision may be, and how deeply you fear the effects on your own economic health, this is not the moment to judge, argue, or act impulsively. Rather, now is the moment to test the performing arts industry’s so oft-toted (and even more often self-proclaimed) reputation for being able to support one another in surviving a time of crisis and to coalesce as a community in working towards a greater and larger mission. I know you can do it without suing on another!

…And now, to throw some bleach on my keyboard and sage the office!

____________________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Acts of God, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Uncategorized | Comments Closed

Beware of Wolves In Expert Clothing!

Thursday, March 3rd, 2016

By Robyn Guilliams, Esq.   

Dear Law & Disorder,

I am a member of a band in Canada, and we do quite a few performances in the U.S. each year.  Our accountant has always told us that we don’t need to file income tax returns in the U.S., because the band is incorporated, and also because our U.S. fees are exempt from tax in the U.S. under the U.S. / Canada tax treaty.  We haven’t had any problems for the past four years, but now the IRS is contacting each of the venues for our U.S. shows, and telling them that they have to withhold tax of 30% of our gross.  The IRS also says that each band member must file individual U.S. tax returns for the past seven years, AND that our corporation doesn’t shield us from U.S. taxes.  Help!  Our Canadian accountant claims that he is an expert regarding U.S. taxes, but I’m worried he might not be.

Oh dear – I’m sorry to hear about your tax mess.  It certainly sounds as if your Canadian accountant is no expert!  I’m afraid I hear this sort of story quite often.  Many of our clients have come to us after a so-called “expert” handled their U.S. taxes (or visas) and got them into a world of trouble with the IRS (or USCIS).

The IRS is correct in telling you that any nonresident individual who works in the U.S. must file an individual U.S. tax return.  (There are a few VERY LIMITED exceptions to this rule, but none apply here.)  You may owe no tax.  Perhaps your net income was below a certain limit (or sadly, nonexistent), or perhaps you qualify for an exemption from U.S. tax under the U.S. tax treaty with Canada.  Still – you must file a return to report your income!  After a certain amount of time, you lose the right to deduct your expenses (i.e., you’ll be taxed on your gross income), and you’ll lose your right to claim a tax treaty exemption.

U.S. tax laws and regulations are extremely complex, especially concerning taxation of nonresidents.  As an example, this regulation is just one of many concerning nonresident tax withholding. Welcome to my world!

A knowledgeable tax advisor can help an individual to reduce his or her tax liability, which may save a performer or group a substantial amount in U.S. taxes.  On the other hand, an incorrectly prepared return can trigger an IRS audit!  At the moment, I’m working with five – FIVE – nonresident clients who are being audited.  In each case, the return was prepared a self-professed “expert”, and it included numerous errors, including mischaracterizations of income and/or expenses, claiming exemptions or deductions to which my client was not entitled, and failing to include required schedules and attachments.

Here are a few helpful hints for those in search of assistance in preparing a U.S. nonresident (or any other) return:

  • Check out the IRS’s “Tax Tip” on choosing a preparer at https://www.irs.gov/uac/Choose-Your-Tax-Preparer-Wisely.
  • Before hiring any tax preparer, check his or her credentials on the IRS website at http://irs.treasury.gov/rpo/rpo.jsf.
  • Be aware that, by law, anyone who receives payment to prepare a tax return is required to obtain a Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN) from the IRS, and to sign and include their PTIN on all client returns.  A PTIN always begins with “P” and is followed by eight numerical digits.  If your preparer does not have a PTIN – run away!

I hope this is helpful to you!

__________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and otherGG_logo_for-facebook legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.com

All questions on any topic related to legal, management, and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

 

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Central Withholding Agreements, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Taxes, Touring, Uncategorized, Visas | Comments Closed

Ueno Opera to Premiere in Boston

Thursday, May 1st, 2014

GalloCover

I recently spoke with my friend Ken Ueno, a composer on the faculty at UC Berkeley, about the upcoming premiere of his opera Gallo. It will be presented by Guerrilla Opera in May in Boston. Below are excerpts from our chat.

 

CC: How did you come to decide to compose an opera? 

 

KU: Theater has always interested me. I used to mimic the skits of my favorite comedians, the Drifters, on Japanese television. (I remember I got kicked out of a French-speaking kindergarten class in Switzerland doing one of those skits – I was just trying to make friends!) As I kid, whenever my family and I visited New York or London, we took in all the shows – musicals, plays. (I took tap dancing classes.) And later in life, I discovered Samuel Beckett, who remains one of my biggest heroes. As I got into composing concert works, much of my music still embodies some sort of theatrical component.  And over the past 10 years, as I have been performing as a vocalist more and more, I have been feeling that a natural development would be to do a theater work with voice. What made that desire concrete was when Guerilla Opera reached out to me and invited me to collaborate.

 

What is the significance of the title?

 

The central concern of the piece is man’s relationship to the landscape, how we shape the landscape, as well as how the landscape shapes us. A question of ontology.  The central scene, which was the first thing I conceived, is an aria for a countertenor in a rooster costume dressed as an 18th century dandy. I thought it would make a nice balance between the humorous and the intellectual to have the said rooster soliloquize, wax profanely, about ontology (there’s highfaluting Voltaire, Shakespeare and Heiner Müller in there), while singing in chickenese with subtitles. It’s ridiculous. And that’s part of the commentary on ontology. It’s easy to complain about the world, or dream of something, but it takes courage to actually realize, actually make the ridiculous thing. In that creative realization, there is hope – that’s when we can transform the world, rather than have the world constrain us. People will always criticize everything, so we can’t be afraid of it. That’s why it’s a rooster – chicken or “being chicken” is a common vernacular for being afraid, of course. I also thought of Max Ernst’s (a leading 20th century German painter) alter ego, Loplop, a birdlike figure that he included in many works to stand as his alter ego. In a sense, we are all Loplop, we are all the rooster of ontology, we all face life and death and crises of identity.

 

A large part of the concept of the piece was planned during my residency at Civitella Ranieri.  There, each night, when we had dinner, we were served wine in clay pitchers shaped like roosters. “Gallo” is Italian for rooster. It dawned on me towards the end of my time there that the piece should be called “Gallo.”

 

How did you decide to write your own libretto?

 

As I conceived of the idea and the sounds (including the vocal sounds), it felt natural that I would do it. I understand that many composers get the idea to do an opera then go looking for an appropriate text to set. The evolution of this project didn’t unfold that way. I was also not interested in a traditional narrative. There was also another personal need. Over the last several years, as a creative artist, I have been feeling a desire to step beyond just writing music.  Of course, composing remains the thing I most self-identify with, but I also enjoy making visual art and writing poetry. The secret is that I have been writing poetry ever since I was a kid, though I’ve been shy about sharing it. So, this scary thing (scary to me, as I’m as yet not as used to it as I am about writing music) about writing my own words and getting it out there felt like the right personal risk to take at this time. One has to get in the habit of taking risks, being courageous.

 

Did you consider singing in the piece as well?

 

Not for this project.  Guerilla Opera expressed an interest in a piece mainly for their core members.  I’m happy with that, since they are such talented, committed performers.  Besides, I am conceiving of other projects in which I can sing.

 

The two principals are a countertenor and a soprano. What are their characters like and why did you select these particular voices?

 

The countertenor is the rooster.  Since much of the text he contemplates is rooted in the philosophical discussions of the 18th century, a countertenor voice seemed appropriate. Also, having worked with the Hilliard Ensemble over a number of years, David James’ singing has been a big influence on me. The soprano is the shopper/mother figure and was conceived for the particular talents of Aliana de la Guardia, one of the directors of Guerilla Opera, and an amazing talent.

 

What’s with the Cheerios? What about the other pop culture references?

 

Inspired by Beckett’s Happy Days, I wanted the set to be a landscape, a character.  The set, then, is an installation.  I wanted a beach-like feel, a repository of memories, family vacations, Cheerios, as compared to other cereals, look more beach-like. It also makes a better canvas for video projections. Cheerios are childhood comfort food.  It’s the childhood cereal that’s good for you.

 

The text is full of pop references, besides the literary (the aforementioned Voltaire, Shakespeare, Müller as well as Joyce and Carroll).  Many references are about consumer culture.  Others are references to songs – Janis Joplin, Beastie Boys, Van Morrison, Jimi Hendrix.  They occurred to me as I was writing the text.  “Mercedes Benz,” when I was writing about consumer culture. Beastie Boys, when I was writing about the difference between semantic sounds and asemic sounds (the “ill communication”). Van Morrison about breathing.  And Hendrix’s “majestic and superior cackling hen,Your people I do not understand.”  There’s a surprise ending that references a meta-ending of all meta-endings.  All these things are just how I speak – a mishmash of all the things I’ve read, seen, and thought about. I hope it’s entertaining for the audience.  Most of it you don’t have to “get” a local reference to get the whole picture. Fredric Jameson, the philosopher, says that one of the conditions of postmodernism is that time is flattened into a space. The Cheerios and the cultural references articulate that space in Gallo. Music is also flattened into a space – the baroque, the contemporary, a lullaby are all there too.

Do you have some other projects in process? What’s next?

 

I have an installation opening at the Taipei Fine Arts Museum the first week of May. Then, a new string quartet for Mivos premiering at Darmstadt, an evening-long work for Community Music Works for the rededication of the Dainichi Buddha at the RISD Museum, a piece for the Paul Dresher Ensemble with Amy X Neuberg for Cal Performances, a violin concerto for Graeme Jennings and the San Francisco Contemporary Music Players, and a few other exciting things upcoming!

When/where are the premiere performances of Gallo?

 

The premiere performances will be at the Zack Box Theater at The Boston Conservatory
8 The Fenway, Boston, MA, on these dates:

 

May 22 – 24, 2014 (at 8pm)
May 29 & 30, 2014 (at 8pm)
May 31, 2914 (at 2pm)

 

Posted in The New Classical, Uncategorized | Comments Closed

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »